1. Field of the Invention
This invention is directed to a device. More specifically, this invention concerns itself with a unique toothbrush configuration having two distinct bristle configurations, one on each end of the handle.
2. Description of the Prior Art
The need to properly brush one's teeth is a proposition that needs little if any further explanation. Good dental hygiene is essential for the prevention of tooth decay, the elimination of bad breath, and healthy gums. It has long been recognized that proper brushing is required to stimulate the gum tissue and the prevention of plaque which can lead to gum disease, tooth decay, and eventually permanent tooth loss.
As is also fairly apparent, the present state of the art in toothbrush design has up to now been limited to modification in the angle of bristles relative to the handle and different combinations of bristles in the brush itself. This design is recognized as fairly effective and efficient for cleansing the surface of the teeth which are in plain view (the outside surface). The efficiency of current toothbrush designs does not, however, address the more difficult problem of cleansing the inside surfaces of the teeth. At best, such designs do a poor job on the inside surfaces of a portion of the teeth and are totally ineffective for the cleansing of the inside surfaces of some teeth altogether--even if the user is persistent and adept enough to brush his teeth with both his right and left hand.
Alternative toothbrush designs have been proposed in the past, and for one reason or another, have failed to capture the attention of toothbrush manufacturers, the dental health profession and the consumer. Many of these designs attempt to address the shortcomings in the configurations which are presently commercially available. A number of these alternate configurations are represented in the following issued patents: U.S. Pat. Nos. 2,051,687 (to Dressler); 2,084,873 (to Strause); 2,697,239 (to Funk); and Des. 241,286 (to Hadley).
U.S. Pat. No. 2,051,687 (to Dressler), describes a toothbrush comprising a handle having an array of bristles (brush) on one end thereof. This brush appears to be a separate and independent element which is detachably connected to the handle through a series of complimentary fittings. The bristle support and bristles themselves form a convex cleansing appliance which is configured for cleansing the inside surfaces of the user's teeth. In the embodiments of this invention illustrated in the Dressler patent, the brush and handle can be engaged to one another in any one of three different positions. By switching the handle from one position to another, it is possible for the user to clean all the inside surfaces of his teeth without changing hands or otherwise shifting the position of the brush within his hand. Dressler clearly recognizes the inadequacies of early designs which employ a crescent-shaped brush in a single or fixed position. Dressler's concept, although designed to overcome this limitation, is cumbersome and relatively inefficient. More specifically, Dressler would require the user to periodically interrupt brushing of the inside surface of his teeth to change the position of the crescent-shaped brush relative to the handle. In practice, the user would be required to reposition the crescent-shaped brush at least twice during each brushing sequence. This is not only time consuming and somewhat awkward, but also conceivably requires reapplication of tooth paste to the brush and the rinsing of the user's hands. Other limitations in the Dressler design include the possible and unintended detachment of the brush from the handle during brushing, thus, requiring the user to interrupt the cleansing of his teeth and reconfigure the toothbrush.
U.S. Pat. No. 2,084,873 (to Strause), describes a toothbrush having a "S" shaped handle and two different configuration of bristles (brushes), one configuration being positioned on each end. One set of bristles is designed for cleansing the outer surfaces of the teeth (reference numerals 9,10); and the other "dome" shaped bristles) the inside surfaces of the teeth. The single fixed position of the crescent-shaped brush is, thus, ineffective to cleanse the inside surface of the teeth of the lingual arch. At best, the user of the Strauss brush will be required to frequently reposition the brush relative to the inside surface of the teeth on either side of the mouth. The unorthodox handle further complicates the manipulation of the brush relative to the inside surface of the front teeth.
U.S. Pat. No. 2,697,239 (to Funk), describes a toothbrush having a crescent-shaped bristle configuration designed to fit the front lingual arch of the user's mouth. The Funk design is distinct from the configuration of the Dressler patent (previously discussed) in that the tips of bristles in the Dressler design are contoured specifically to fit the front lingual arch, whereas the Funk design aligns the side of the bristles to conform to the front lingual arch. The tips of the bristles are, thus, not in direct opposing contact with the surface of the teeth. The Dressler patent was not cited as prior art of record during the prosecution of the Funk patent. The Funk design, thus, suffers from the same limitations confronted by Dressler at the time of the definition of the Dressler concept. In summary, the Funk device is clearly limited in its ability to cleanse the inside surfaces of the teeth in the front lingual arch, due to the inappropriate orientation of the tips of the bristles relative to the inside surfaces of the teeth and the single or fixed position of the brush relative to the handle.
U.S. Pat. No. Des. 241,286 (to Hadley), describes a unique handle design for a Dressler-like toothbrush. Unlike Dressler, however, the Hadley handle is integral with the bristle support and is not detachable from the bristle support. The Hadley design, thus, suffers from many of the same limitations inherent in the Dressler and Funk configurations (i.e. fixed position bristles, awkward for cleansing of inside surface of teeth outside of the front lingual arch, etc.--the term "fixed" as used in reference to the Dressler configuration, referring to the position of the bristles relative to the handle orientation during the cleasning operation).
As is evident from the foregoing discussion, current toothbrush design leaves a great deal to be desired, particularly with respect to cleansing of the inside surfaces of one's teeth. Alternatives to the present standard design have been put forth and have not proven attractive enough from the standpoint of convenience or effectiveness to displace the current standard. One possible reason for such reluctance or indifference by manufacturers to change from the standard design is the mistaken belief that consumers are satisfied and/or would not accept any revolutionary change, notwithstanding the relative ineffectiveness of the standard design to effectively clean the inside surfaces of the user's teeth. With the increasing public awareness of the relationship between plaque and peridontal disease, the shortcomings inherent in standard toothbrush design, consumers and dental healthcare professionals are becoming increasingly dissatisfied with the cleansing efficiency of a standard toothbrush. Unfortunately, one of the proposed alternatives to this design have apparently been sufficiently effective or attractive to displace the standard toothbrush design either in the eyes of the manufacturer or the potential customer. Thus, there remains a continuing unfulfilled need in improvement to the current state of the art in these dental hygiene appliances.